Britain: Feminist Labour MP whose tweet advocated punching Milo Yiannopoulos is lead figure behind proposed Social Media Malicious Communications Bill

Feminist Labour MP whose tweet advocated punching Milo Yiannopoulos is lead figure behind proposed Social Media Malicious Communications Bill


No doubt most readers will by now have seen the astonishing exchange on Channel 4 news between Milo Yiannopoulos  and feminist presenter Cathy Newman. Without getting into too much detail, Milo was Milo and as a result Newman completely lost the plot, abandoning any sense of professionalism or integrity in her failed attempts to smear her interviewee.


The discussion trended on Twitter and promoted furious reactions from feminists, not least Anna Turley, Labour MP for Redcar, the former seat of Vera Baird of all people (a radical feminist who’s sexism we at HEqual have both previously exposed and completely defeated).


It’s likely that many missed Turley’s tweet as it has been ignored by the entire mainstream media and only reported by Guido Fawkes thus far. She wrote: “@channel4News sorry but how did you not punch him in his smug smirky face @cathynewman? Very restrained”. This is quite a contrast to the widespread coverage of a similar Tweet by Tory MP Michael Fabricant in 2014.

Twitter screen-shots can of course be faked and the tweet has now been deleted so it might be hard to prove it to be genuine. Thankfully, any Tweets deleted by MPs are archived and therefore we’ve been able to verify its authenticity.

So, we know for sure that Turley advocates violence against homosexual males who have different political views and dare to have a smug smirky face when they effortlessly come out on top in a discussion despite massive efforts to smear him. Worse than that, she argues that a woman not punching her male in the face when they lose a debate is in fact “very restrained”, thus suggesting that violence against men is not only justified, but in fact the default response for your average woman/feminist who loses an argument.

Like so many sexist Labour MPs, Turley is only in her position thanks to blatant discrimination against men, having been selected for her seat via a controversial all-women shortlist. She fits perfectly with other Labour stereotypes, with no local knowledge connection to her constituents, having been born hundreds of miles away in Dartford. She even lived in Islington at one point and such was local opposition to her that no less than ten local Labour Councillors strongly voiced their dissatisfaction and were even deselected for doing so!

Some digging by Richard Delingpole uncovered Turley’s “anti-violence” work, including support for the outrageously sexist “White Ribbon” campaign, an organisation claiming to oppose domestic violence. In reality, they only oppose one particular form of domestic violence, that being “men’s violence against women”, thus ignoring and marginalising all male victims, all homosexual victims not to mention child victims too.

So, thus far Turley’s “anti-violence” work is entirely compatible with her support for violence against Yiannopoulos. However, in July she tabled a Private Members Bill for MPs to “discuss the increasing number of cases of threats and abuse made over the internet”.

Netherlands Physicians Support Measure Allowing Doctors to Euthanize Children

The January 10, 2018 edition of the journal Pediatrics features an “Ethics Round” article titled: Should Pediatric Euthanasia be Legalized?

The Pediatrics article features comments by proponents and opponents of child euthanasia—“philosophers from the United States and the Netherlands, and a Dutch pediatrician.” The article clarifies that, in the Netherlands, euthanasia is a legal option for children (ages 12 – 18) with parental permission and to newborns, who are younger than one, based on the “Groningen Protocol.” The authors argue that these deaths are rare.

It is particularly concerning that the Netherlands “experts,” Marije Brouwer, MA, Els Maeckelberghe, Ph.D., and Eduard Verhagen, M.D., JD, Ph.D., stated:

We would advise the Minister of Health to consider removing age restrictions from both the Euthanasia Regulation and the Groningen Protocol. This would make euthanasia accessible for competent and incompetent children who suffer unbearably when there is no other way to relieve their suffering. It would show trust in mature minors, parents, and doctors to make the right decisions.

Our advice to remove age restrictions is in line with important Dutch values. We believe in self-determination, as manifested by the voluntary request that initiates the procedure, and in the beneficence of physicians to end unbearable suffering when there are no other options.

We would cautiously remind the Minister that the group of incompetent patients who also might suffer unbearably is not limited to the age of 12 but encompasses patients of all ages.

Brouwer, Maeckelberghe, and Verhagen state that euthanasia should be permitted when a person is incompetent to request death by lethal injection and that the decision should be left to the “beneficence” of physicians. Choice and autonomy were never centrally important, since the law always gave physicians the power to decide. People with disabilities should be concerned when lethal injection can be done based on the beneficence of a physician.

Click here to sign up for pro-life news alerts from

Euthanasia of incompetent people is not new in the Netherlands or Belgium. A recent study published in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) (August 3, 2017) found 431 terminations of life without request in the Netherlands in 2015. Similar studies indicate that euthanasia without consent is even more common in Belgium.

Professor of Philosophy Christopher Kaczor disagreed with Brouwer, Maeckelberghe, and Verhagen. Kaczor states

Defenders of the Dutch law permitting intentional killing of infants as well as adults and children 12 years of age and older presuppose an empirical claim: killing a person is “the only escape from the situation” of unbearable suffering. This claim is false.

Current Dutch law does allow for non voluntary euthanasia of infants, an allowance incompatible with the principles of justice because such infants do not consent to have their lives ended. If all persons are to have equal rights and deserve equal protection of the law, then disabled persons (whether they are infants, children, or adults) deserve the same basic protections from intentional homicide.

The Pediatrics article also features comments from long-time euthanasia promoter, Margaret Battin and opposition by John D. Lantos.

Dutch journalist, Gerbert van Loenen, in his book – Do You Call This A Life? –explains that euthanasia without consent based on beneficence, was part of the euthanasia practice, in the Netherlands, from the beginning.

In his book, van Loenen examines the stories and cultural change that led to the legalization and then acceptance of euthanasia in the Netherlands. Note: Alex Schadenberg is the executive director of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition and you can read his blog here.

Transgender Mafia Puts Disabled Vet on Unemployment

Will Caligan, a Desert Shield and Desert Storm veteran suffering Gulf War Syndrome, is out of a job. What caused him to lose it is one more weight on the scale that is tipping America toward total insanity. Caligan is a talented comics artist who contracted with Short Fuse Media Group to produce comic books. If you have followed any of my investigations into #Comicsgate you would know that the comics industry has been completely taken over by rabid alt-left types who spent their days devising ways to destroy beloved characters by “diversifying” them into an approved SJW mold. Caligan, a conservative Christian, had little chance of survival in that environment. One hint of wrongthink could spell curtains for any artist, writer or producer in today’s comics climate. In Caligan’s case, he made the catastrophic mistake of voicing his opinion about a pop culture story about a straight man rebuffing a kiss from a transwoman.

A few weeks ago, rapper Ginuwine was caught in an uncomfortable situation where a transgendered male-to-female tried to kiss him. When he rebuffed the advances, the internet accused him of transphobia. The lesson here seems to be that if Harvey Weinstein tries to kiss a woman, that’s assault. But if a transgendered person tries to force someone to kiss him, there is a requirement for the victim to prove a lack of transphobia by complying. Caligan posted his thoughts on this situation and then all hell broke loose.

Black Lives Matter Organizer Summons Spirits of Deceased African American Leaders in Methodist Church

regular readers already know these leftists are into dark practices like necromancy, witchcraft, etc

HOLLYWOOD, Calif. — One of the organizers of the group Black Lives Matter summoned the spirits of a number of deceased African American leaders—a practice of necromancy that is prohibited by Scripture—on Thursday during an event held by Justice LA at Hollywood United Methodist Church.

The event, which according to the group’s Facebook page, was meant to discuss opposition to the $3.5 million the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors wants to use for new jails. It featured representatives from White People for Black Lives, the ACLU of Southern California, and Dr. Melina Abdullah, a professor at California State University who was also one of the organizers of the national Black Lives Matter movement.

“This is not just a social justice, a racial justice, an economic justice struggle,” Abdullah stated. “This is also a spiritual struggle, so it’s appropriate that we’re here in this setting (a church). And it’s also important that we summon the right energy into this space no matter what faith you are. We have to understand what the struggle is about.”

During the event, Abdullah told those gathered that she was going to “pour libation” in the name of her African American ancestors, an act that is defined as “a ritual pouring of a liquid as an offering to a god or spirit, or in memory of those who have ‘passed on.’”

“We’re going to summon their energy into this space,” she stated, “and I’m going to ask you all to join me.”

Adbullah said that she wanted to first summon those who had been killed by law enforcement and then other deceased leaders who fought for the rights of African Americans. She instructed the crowd that as she named a person, and then poured the libation—using a bottle of water to pour into a plant—those gathered were to then declare “ashe.”

According to the website, “ashe” or “ase” means “so be it,” and is an “African philosophical concept through which the Yoruba of Nigeria conceive the power to make things happen and produce change.”

“Ashe among the Yoruba is associated with the very force which is life and brings them into being in the universe. … [I]t is also associated with the power of speech as can be seen in its meaning of command, ordain and law,” the site explains, stating that the Yoruba believe that men possess the power to “speak things into existence.”

During the event, Abdullah proceeded to summon spirits—claiming that their bodies may be dead, but their souls are still on the earth—pouring into the plant with each name, while the crowd declared “ashe” each time.

“We summon those spirits that are still with us. We summon those people whose bodies have been stolen, but whose souls are still here,” she said. “We call on Wakiesha Wilson. We call on George Jackson … Eric Garner …”

“And all of those whose bodies have been stolen: We ask that you be with us. We ask that you work through us. We ask that we do righteous work on your behalf,” Abdullah continued in speaking to the the dead.

She then began to summon deceased men and women who she called “warriors” in the struggle.

“We call on Martin Luther King into this space,” Abdullah said. “Brother Malcom [X], we call you into this space. Ashe. … Nat Turner, into this space. Ashe. Mother Harriet Tubman. Ashe.”

“We call you all into this space. We ask that you work through us. That you give us power; that the Creator give us power when we come together. This victory is assured. Ashe. Ashe. Ashe,” she concluded, pouring the rest of the water into the plant, and being joined with applause.

Scripture states speaking to the dead or summoning spirits is a violation of the law of God.

Deuteronomy 18:10-12 reads, “There shall not be found among you anyone who makes his son or his daughter pass through the fire, one who uses divination, one who practices witchcraft, or one who interprets omens, or a sorcerer, or one who casts a spell, or a medium, or a spiritist, or one who calls up the dead. For whoever does these things is detestable to the Lord, and because of these detestable things the Lord your God will drive them out before you.”

Why Leftists Hate Masculinity

An ongoing mantra of the left is that everyone is a victim, with a singular carve-out for white men.  A large group of the female population has embraced this chant.

While there may be a number of grievances put forth by this movement, there also comes a theme that is particularly dangerous: the feminist attack on masculinity.  This is derived not only from feminists; it comes from the left in general.

There has emerged a war on masculinity.  Why?  Because masculine men are harder to control under tyrannical socialism.  The modern beta male, on the other hand, craves socialism.  This is why the left has branded masculinity as toxic: it stands as a roadblock to their endgame.

Leftists blame, of all things, masculinity for the recent spate of sexual harassment scandals.  For eons, masculinity has been considered a natural and even required trait of being male, but it is now apparently the reason for deviancy.  Who knew?

The glaring problem with this argument is that the men who are typically being accused of such transgressions are anything but masculine.  Sexual harassment is bipartisan; both liberal and conservative men in positions of power seem to harass women with aplomb.  But where is this referenced masculinity?  Harvey Weinstein?  Al Franken?  Louis CK?  I posit that a consistent theme among most accused harassers is a complete lack of masculinity.  I would go so far as to suggest that the lack of masculinity is a contributing factor to this problem.

Most of these accused public figures are modern men – perhaps not quite beta males, but certainly closer to Obama’s now infamous Pajama Boy than they are to John Wayne.   Are men who display a lack of masculinity less likely to victimize women?  Obviously not.  But the left does not let reason or rationality interfere with an opportunity to degrade social decency or further its collectivist agenda.

The feminist hatred for masculinity is only another tool in the toolbox of communism.  Masculinity tends to make a man individualistic.  Individualistic men are capitalists, not communists.  They are men who cherish individual liberty, and they rely on themselves rather than on government.  Self-reliance is a four-letter word for leftists, and masculine men are generally self-reliant.  Beta males like Pajama Boy rely on government, and such modern men, devoid of any semblance of masculinity, are ideal for leftist indoctrination.

Were the frontiersmen communists or capitalists?  How about the cowboys?  How about the Navy SEALs or Army Rangers?  Sure, the press may find in the military a few Che Guevara t-shirt-wearing idiots and parade them all over the place, but I am willing to bet that the majority of SEAL Team 6 comprises masculine capitalists.

What games do young boys play?  They pretend to be cowboys.  They pretend to be soldiers.   They don’t pretend to be soviet textile workers slaving under Stalin’s system.  They don’t pretend to be entitled Millennial brats who congregate at Starbucks and talk about the wonders of socialism, either.  Most boys hit the ground embracing masculinity.  Some maintain it, but many have it berated out of them by the weak society they walk in or by their leftist parents.

Masculinity leads a man to seek to better himself in many regards, while collectivism thrives on mediocrity.  Collectivism in this country is sought by the lazy who don’t want to work but feel entitled to free handouts of all kinds.  Unfortunately, collectivism is also touted by many who are successful, such as middle-class suburbanites who feel guilty for what they have achieved through hard work while others have not been so fortunate.  Yet, when suggesting that the redistribution effort begins with their own 401(k)s, seldom will you find volunteers.  Collectivism is also cheered on by certain billionaire hypocrites who made their wealth through capitalism yet now tout the wonders of socialist systems.  The irony.

While these social groups appear quite different, there is a common trait among the men in all of them: no masculinity to be found.  Be it the lanky hipster in skinny jeans or the billionaire hypocrite, imposing is not one of their descriptions.  The billionaire may travel everywhere with a fleet of personal security, but he has no strength of body and apparently little strength of character.  Are there plenty of physically weak men who are capitalists?  Absolutely.  Capitalism is not dependent on machismo or charisma.  However, few alphas are socialist, and self-reliance is a collectivism-killer.  That is why the left finds masculinity toxic.

The denigration of masculinity is high on the leftist agenda.  The pushing of acceptance of the “transgender” movement is the latest machination in this crusade.  This fosters further blurring of male masculinity and female femininity, and the plight of a small group of people who wrestle with this issue has become a politically polarizing topic – a tool maximized by the left.  Masculinity is maligned as a trait of the bigot, not as a desirable trait among men, as it once was.  The goal is to foster an entirely androgynous society that makes no distinction between male and female.  This breeds a culture more easily shaped by the almighty state.

The left’s war on masculinity should come as no surprise.  The cultures in history that have resisted oppressive regimes in the past have celebrated masculinity rather than demeaned it.

There is an often quoted poem that sums up a society’s life cycle: “hard times create strong men, strong men create good times, good times create weak men, weak men create hard times.”  The abundance of weak men in our society is ushering in those hard times, and it is celebrated by the left every step of the way.

The eradication of masculinity from our society will ultimately result in the elimination of all resistance to tyranny.  Freedom-loving males know this, and women who believe in individual capability rather than dependence on the government also know it.  Remember: subjugation of all to a collectivist regime is the ultimate goal, and branding masculinity as toxic is one of many pieces in the game.

Road To One World Government: International court orders 16 countries to ignore their laws and allow gay ‘marriage’

January 16, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) – In what one expert called the “most bold exercise in judicial tyranny imaginable,” an international human rights court has ordered that 16 countries ignore their own laws and recognize same-sex “marriage” and transgenderism.

In one of these countries, Barbados, sodomy is illegal.

The ruling came from the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, which exists based on the American Convention of Human Rights. Twenty-five Latin and South American countries have ratified or adhered to the Convention, according to the Court’s website.

The Court heard the case because the Costa Rican government sought “relatively minor” advice, Gualberto Garcia Jones, executive director of International Human Rights Group, told LifeSiteNews.

“Costa Rican officials asked for clarification on what process [was] required to legally change the name of a gender confused person and the rights to property of homosexual partners under the Convention,” Jones explained. “Instead of answering the questions asked, the court attempted to issue a unilateral ruling that homosexual marriage with adoption rights is required by the American Convention on Human Rights.”

The Court “overreached its jurisdiction in an unprecedented manner,” Jones said, ignoring the Vienna Convention – the accepted rules of interpretation for international treaties – and instead delegating “to itself the authority to overrule national constitutions in order to implement its opinions.”

Gay Star News called it the “biggest marriage equality court order in history.”

Judge Vio Grossi partially dissented, writing, “Legislation recognizing same sex unions cannot be imposed upon member states through the judicial process, much less so through an advisory opinion, which is not binding even on the party requesting the opinion, and much less upon the other member states.”

There is “no source of international law that provides the necessary recognition of such [homosexual] rights,” Grossi wrote.

The Court also ignored “the text of the American Convention itself, whose only reference to marriage limits it to the union of one man and one woman,” said Jones.

The order “pretends to overturn the overwhelming majority of the internal legislation that defines marriage as the union of one man and one woman through an advisory opinion,” he said. “This would be impossible even if the opinion of the court came after a litigated case in controversy, since the rulings of the court are only binding upon the litigating parties.”

“Therefore, to attempt to impose an advisory opinion as binding upon all countries that ratified the convention is the most bold exercise in judicial tyranny imaginable,” Jones warned.

The ruling even went as far as to say “polygamous families” are licit.

“The richness and diversity of the region is seen in the cases that are submitted to the court; through those cases the court has recognized diverse family makeups as protected, including polygamous families,” the majority ruling said on page 78, which Jones translated for LifeSiteNews.

Opposition to same-sex “marriage” that is “based on religious or philosophical convictions” shouldn’t be considered, the ruling said.

This “shows a visible prejudice against religious convictions and religious individuals,” said Jones.

The court disqualified “any principles which it arbitrarily determines to be religious ones without bothering to offer any legal precedent for such anti-religious prejudice.”

It also didn’t produce “any analysis that opposition to same-sex unions is in fact a theological position.”

Eleven countries “must pass trans rights laws” because of this ruling, Gay Star Newswrote. The Dominican Republic, Honduras, Barbados, Nicaragua, Paraguay, and Suriname are the countries most affected by this ruling, because they neither recognize same-sex “marriage” or transgenderism.

Brazil and Colombia already recognize same-sex “marriage” and transgenderism. Parts of Mexico do as well.

Perú, Panamá, Guatemala, El Salvador, and Bolivia all have some pro-transgender laws but not same-sex “marriage.”

Williams College Students Can Snitch On Each Other for ‘Making Comments on Social Media’ About Religion or Politics

Williams College is one of at least 100 campuses with a system in place for students to report each other for saying or doing something slightly offensive. These trivially disturbing occurrences are known as “bias incidents”—and at Williams, virtually anything could qualify.

According to the Massachusetts college’s website, “name-calling and stereotyping” are examples of bias. Telling a joke that draws its humor from a stereotype is also wrong. Students shouldn’t use slurs, or the word “gay” as an insult, or display “a sign that is color­coded pink for girls and blue for boys,” or imitate someone’s “cultural norm or practice.”

And since religion and political affiliation are considered protected classes for the purposes of categorizing bias incidents, the following kinds of expression are also considered verboten:

Making comments on social media about someone’s disability, ethnicity, race, national origin, gender, gender identity or expression, sexual orientation, religion, or political affiliations/beliefs

Writing on a white board about someone’s disability, ethnicity, national origin, race, gender, gender identity or expression, sexual orientation, religion, or political affiliations/beliefs

Drawing or creating pictures that imitate, stereotype, or belittle/ridicule someone because of their gender, gender expression, race, ethnicity, national origin, disability, sexual orientation, faith, or political affiliation

Mocking someone’s disability on Twitter would be awful. “Making comments on social media” about another person’s religious or political beliefs isn’t remotely similar. Some people’s religious and political beliefs should be discussed, challenged, and even mocked. As the Harvard psychologist Steven Pinker once observed, “that’s the difference between a university and a madrassa.”

As The College Fix noted in a recent article about Williams’ bias reporting procedures, the college’s website correctly distinguishes between a bias incident and a hate crime, explicitly telling students that the former is not a crime. Still, the website claims that bias incidents are “abhorrent and intolerable” and that any people who think they’re victims of, or witnesses to, such an episode should feel free to report it to the proper authorities: the Dean of the College, the Office of Strategic Planning and Diversity, counselling services, or even campus security.

It bears repeating that the theory behind bias reporting systems—that relatively trivial slights, known as microaggressions, can negatively impact students’ educational experience if left unaddressed—is scientifically unsound. In his review of the research concerning microaggressions, the Emory clinical psychologist Scott Lilienfeld found little evidence of such a connection between microaggressions and psychological trauma. And when the Cato Institute polled minority students about whether various microaggressions offended them, most said nope.

Canadian Government Says Catholic Priest Has to Support Abortion to Qualify for Federal Program



An Ottawa Catholic priest had hoped to employ three students this summer to work in the church yard and office.

But the Rev. Tim Moyle will not be able to this year unless he complies with the government’s demand that he support abortion for any reason up to birth.

Many churches and other groups provide students with summer jobs through the Canadian Summer Jobs program. However, the new 2018 grant application requires groups to say that they respect “reproductive rights,” including abortion on demand, as one of their core values. Groups cannot submit the online application unless they do, The National Post reports.

The decision sparked a huge backlash. Hundreds of groups that used to employ students have said they cannot comply with the government’s ideological demands.

Ottawa Citizen reports Moyle serves three parishes in a rural area of the Upper Ottawa Valley. In the past, his parishes received grants to employ students to work on the lawns and yards and in the office.

“We’re giving some kids going to college a chance for a job. Not a lot of work up here,” Moyle said.

This summer, however, they will not be able to employ students, and abortion activists are to thank for it.

Here’s more from the report:

[Moyle said:] The government says ‘Oh you can apply as a church. That’s not a problem.’ But we would have to compromise what we believe by making this attestation.”

The parish priest mentioned the problem in the parish bulletin, told the congregation at mass’s end one Sunday, and drew the bishop’s attention to the matter. Friction is clearly building.

Last week, the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops released a statement opposing the required attestation and pointing out a clear conflict with Section 2 of the charter, which guarantees “freedom of conscience and religion” as a fundamental right for every citizen. …

The bishops also predicted that “summer camps will be forced to close,” services from non-profits will be reduced and valuable job experience will be lost.

There seems little hope of immediate relief, despite the strong public outcry. Government leaders have waved off the groups’ concerns, and the Feb. 2 deadline to apply quickly is approaching.

The Canadian government released the discriminatory rules in December.

“… these changes help prevent youth (as young as 15 years of age) from being exposed to employment within organizations that may promote positions that are contrary to the values enshrined in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and associated case law,” the government stated.

SUPPORT LIFENEWS! If you appreciate this pro-life article, please help with a donation!

Last week, pro-abortion Prime Minister Justin Trudeau also denigrated concerns voiced by a pro-life student about free speech.

“If you’re pro-life then you are ridiculed and insulted, but if you’re pro-choice then you’re praised,” the student told Trudeau, according to the National Post. “And I just want to know if this [free speech] is important to you.”

Trudeau answered: “Women have fought for generations for the right to control their own bodies, to be able to choose for themselves what to do with their bodies.

“When those beliefs lead to actions aimed to restrict a women’s right on what to do with her body, that’s where we draw the line,” he continued, according to Global News.

Interestingly, political leaders claimed the new grant rules will help ensure young people are in a learning environment that “respects the rights of all Canadians,” Global News reports. They can say that because Canada does not recognize unborn babies as human beings at any stage of development.

Pro-life groups have received grants in the past to employ students. According to the report, the pro-life Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform received a $56,000 grant in 2016, and two pro-life pregnancy centers received about $12,000 to employ young adults.

Canada has some of the most pro-abortion laws in the world, allowing abortions for any reason up to birth and forcing taxpayers to pay for them in many cases. Common sense regulations such as parental consent for minors, waiting periods, informed consent and other basic measures are non-existent.